First Year at Uni
Helen Cameron and Frank Tesoriero
School of Social Work & Social Policy
University of South Australia
The well documented changes in the nature of higher education include expanding student numbers
and reduced funding. The increasing diversity of students’ educational backgrounds combined with
many of them juggling the demands of study and paid employment has inspired the development of a
range of university services for first year students, to aid transition and to provide more flexible
educational support services. However, we have little evidence in the School of Social Work and
Social Policy of the accessibility or appropriateness of these supports. In an attempt to ascertain first
year students’ levels of knowledge and usage of supports, the authors administered a questionnaire
to a year-one class of students in the School of Social Work and Social Policy. The paper examines
the implications of these research results for developing strategies in providing learning supports
and targeted assistance in relation to transition issues for first year students.
Introduction
The debates in recent literature, most notably in two national studies by McInnis & James
(1995) and McInnis & Krause (2002), expose the complexity of the issues surrounding
transition into university. In particular, the literature acknowledges the dramatic pace of
change in the higher education landscape which has an impact on the first year
experience. The experience of commencing university students is made more complex
when they lack a family background of university study, or when they must work,
sometimes full-time, to support themselves whilst studying. This paper reports on research
into support processes for first year students in two undergraduate programs in 2003 in the
School of Social work and Social Policy, and students' opinions about access to, and value
of, the services made available for commencing students.
Concern for the First year Transition Process
Kantanis (2000, 2001a, 2002) identifies the obstacles inherent in transition to university
and asserts the critical nature of the first year experience in terms of retention, satisfaction
and graduate outcomes. Her work supports earlier work by Tinto (1996) which found that
early experiences deeply affect students’ approaches to study and social life at university.
McInnis et al (2000) found important patterns of change and stability amongst first year
students between 1993 and 1999. The overall conclusion was a trend of less attachment
and lessening commitment to study and more general aspects of university life by
students. McInnis and Krause (2002) maintain that the student identity is now, more than
ever, a negotiated one and students’ engagement with the university must also be
negotiated. The suggested points of intervention with students include recruitment,
enrolment, orientation, the first year, assessment, and early intervention of ‘at risk’
students (defined as those who are failing, have dropped out, or who are not reaching
expected levels of achievement).
Strategies for Supporting Transition
The literature identifies a number of strategies that may increase the effectiveness of
1
attempts to address transition issues in the first year of higher education. Emmitt et al
(2002) advocate the importance of the partnership between support staff and academic
staff. According to Kantanis (2001b) the credibility and legitimacy of transition programs
is partly determined by which staff are involved, and this legitimacy, in turn, contributes
to effectiveness and sustainability of programs. Waters (2002) acknowledges the need to
complement general, institution-wide services, with particular programs and services for
particular student cohorts.
McInnis and Krause (2002) emphasise the need to utilise a range of points of intervention
to successfully induct students into the tertiary education experience. Several writers
conceptualise transition in way useful to our research aims. Mason-Rogers (2002) propose
a ‘template’ for developing strategies to assist retention and success in first year. The
template is designed to check the comprehensiveness of different strategies, and more
particularly to (a) enable staff to view their particular activity as a part of a larger
transition program rather than as a stand alone activity, and to (b) see the areas of strength
and gaps/areas that need to be expanded in any transition program. Tinto (1993) has a
three-stage transition model: separation, transition and integration. Mackie (2001)
hypothesises an interplay between four forces - social, organisational, external and
individual - which, he claims, determines whether students will stay or leave.
Zeegers and Smith (2002) assert the contribution of experiential opportunities to building
identity in first year. Other strategies include the use of study groups (Calder, 2002),
learning communities and mentoring programs, with staff or senior students as mentors
(O’Shea, 2002; Grove, 2002) and networking strategies (Kantanis, 2001a). Several writers
underscore the importance of orientation to provide students with full information and to
begin their connections with each other and with staff (Cairns, 2002; Dickson et al, 2002).
In a more general sense, Lawrence (2002) and Eijkman (2002), challenge the broad
construction of teaching and learning. Eijkman supports this view in his paper on
negotiating divergent discourses.
The Study
The University of South Australia offers graduate and undergraduate programs in the
human services in its School of Social Work and Social Policy, on two of its six
campuses. The study was undertaken at one of its metropolitan campuses with
undergraduate first year students in this School’s two major undergraduate programs. The
survey was conducted in the fourth week of students’ first semester at university and
administered to 145 students attending the two lecture times for a first year course
common to the two undergraduate programs. A total of 201 internal mode students are
enrolled in these lecture times, and this in-class survey reveals a 72% attendance. Hunter
& Tetly (1999) note only a third of students attended all their lectures in a given period, so
in comparison, the attendance rate for our cohort is much higher.
The purpose of the study was to ascertain students’ accessibility to, utilisation of and
views about the range of supports and support services available to them. Across the
University of South Australia and within the School of Social Work and Social Policy a
wide range of support services are offered to students. These include on campus and
online workshops provided by the student learning support service, the Learning
Connection. The Learning Connection also offers individual counselling and referral, and
2
advocacy and access planning services for students with disabilities. The library offers a
range of services and workshops related to its use. Finally, academic staff in the School
of Social Work and Social Policy offers a range of supports to its students, through
Program Directors and within particular courses by lecturers and tutors. All of these
supports are widely promoted to first year students, prior to enrolment, during orientation
and in the early stages of their programs.
The study focused on two intervention points: orientation and the first weeks of
university. The study canvassed student views on supports offered by both academic staff
and general support staff, as well as informal supports. Both the day-time and evening
class were surveyed to gain responses from the widest range of students. The study did
not attempt to collect data on previous academic performance or external variables
affecting students, such as employment responsibilities. These and other variables are
recognised as important predictors of university performance (McKenzie and Schweitzer,
2001) and institutional responses to diverse pathways (such as accurate information to
TAFE-credit students) are important in shaping aspects of the first year experience
(Cameron, 1999).
The Survey Instrument
The survey instrument comprised two lead-in questions, answered through tick boxes,
asking students to identify their pathway into university (i.e. year 12, TAFE or other) and
if they received credit in their program of study. They were also asked to indicate in what
program they are enrolled. The next section entailed asking students to answer Yes or No
to questions about their knowledge about and use of a range of university services,
workshops, staff and informal supports. They were also asked to indicate the helpfulness
of each service and reasons for their non-use of each, if this occurred. The final section
offered a free-form comment opportunity, focused on the main things recalled about their
first few weeks’ experiences in their study, and finishes with a question about their
immediate study intentions.
Results from the Survey
The results of the survey presented in this paper are only preliminary findings. Further
analysis will be undertaken to more closely examine correlations between factors which
may influence the level of support experienced by a diverse cohort of first year students.
Age
Students’ ages ranged from 17 to over 50 years, with 39% of students aged between 21
and 30. The majority - 39% of students - are aged between 21 and 30, whilst the next most
populous group - 30% - are aged between 17 and 20 years, with 70% of this younger
group in the 18 - 19 range.
3
Age Range
60
N
40
20
0
17-20 21-30 31-40 41-50
>50
ages
Gender
89% of students surveyed were female, which is typical of human service programs.
150
100
N
50
0
Male
Female
Pathways
The most numerous group comprises those entering university as a result of previous
TAFE study (29.7%), with 27.5% of these doing so with credit in their current degree.
Those entering on the basis of a South Australian Tertiary Admittance Test (STAT), a
university entrance test for those lacking year 12 or other basis of entry, comprise 25.5%
of the total. School leavers (from 2002 Year 12) form 17.2% of the group, with another
8.9% entering on the basis of previous Year 12 results. Another group (11.7%) have
previous university study as a basis of entry, and one person (0.6%) came in through
Aboriginal special entry provisions. This profile in entry patterns poses challenges for
those concerned with supporting academic success. Those entering from TAFE
backgrounds, especially when they take credit on the basis of their TAFE study, are at risk
of failing according to several Australian studies (Cameron 1999 pp.16-17, Dobson et al
1996 p.23). Likewise, it has been noted that the STAT group display similar risks of
failing or withdrawing prematurely (Cameron 1999 pp.15-16).
40
30
N 20
10
0
School TAFE TAFE Prev
cr
Yr12
STAT T t'fer
Abor
Sp
Programs
The School of Social Work and Social Policy’s two major undergraduate programs are the
4
three year Bachelor of Social Science (Human Service) and the four year Bachelor of
Social Work. There are some double degree programs co-managed between the School of
Social Work and Social Policy and the Unaipon School, the University’s Indigenous
Education School. Of the group surveyed, 66% of students were in the Bachelor of Social
Work program, 28% were in the Bachelor of Social Science and 6% were enrolled in a
double degree program.
100
N
50
0
BSS (HS)
BSW
Double
Degrees
Knowledge of Supports and Services
Of the 32 services listed in the survey instrument, 13 were known about by over 75% or
more of the respondents, and a further 9 services were known about by 50% or more.
Thus the majority of respondents knew about 69% of the services listed. One Online
support, ‘Article Review Guide’ is directly relevant to an early assignment in one of their
core courses, and 97% knew about this one.
Of the remaining 10 services, only 6 were scored by more than 50% of respondents as not
being known about, and two of these (‘withdrawing’ and ‘studying in Adelaide’) are not
likely to interest many of the group who are primarily domestic students, and appear to be
past the point of withdrawing from their study, with over 96% intending to continue with
their study. Other supports, such as ‘Money Matters’, ‘Online study’ and ‘Disabilities’ are
not of common interest to all students.
Overall, the available support services appear to be fairly well known about by most of
the group, especially those most relevant to common study concerns, such as writing
assignments and using the computer network. In general then, the group is characterised
by being knowledgeable of the support services available to them as students.
Utilisation of Supports and Services
The results indicate that amongst all supports and support services, many were not used
by a majority of students (80 or more out of 145 or around 55% of the respondents) in
their first few weeks at university. 12 out of 32 (37.5%) supports were utilised by over 80
students; 14 out of 32 (43.75%) services were not used by 80 or more of the cohort.
Of the 16 Learning Connection services, two (12.5%) were used by 80 or more of the
cohort; 12 of the 16 (75%) were not used by 80 or more students in the cohort. Of the four
services offered by the library, 3 of the 4 (75%) were used by 80 or more students in the
cohort; one support (25%) was not used by 80 or more of the cohort. Of the eight sources
of support within the School of Social Work and Social Policy, 6 of the 8 (75%) were
used by 80 or more students in the cohort; one support (“other staff”) (12.5%) was not
5
used by 80 or more of the cohort. Students were asked to indicate their use of four
informal sources of support, 3 of the 4 (75%) were used by 80 or more students in the
cohort; one support (“other”) (25%) was not used by 80 or more of the cohort. At first
glance, there appears to be a considerable number of services underutilised; and a
minority of the services available which were quite heavily utilised by the cohort.
There are some possible explanations for these usage rates. Two well-used Learning
Connection services were the workshops on using the University’s computer network and
another on guidelines for writing an article review. Much of the University’s information
systems and communication systems are now online. Policies, enrolment, changes to
enrolment, forms, information about services are all contained on the University intranet.
Official communication is email and every student has his or her own email address and
they must manage their email account. It is likely that the workshop on the University’s
computer network was considered as essential to provide foundation knowledge and skills
for participating in the University community. This message was given clearly to students
at several pre enrolment events and during their orientation. The second well patronised
workshop on writing article reviews was developed in liaison with the course coordinator
of a first course in the students’ programs. In this course, an article review is the first
piece of assessment and represents and for most students, this is their first piece of
assessment at university. Their anxiety at facing their first assessment, which requires
critical thinking and analysis, provides some explanation for the high usage rate for this
support.
Many of the other Learning Connection workshops which were poorly utilised by most
students are the online workshops. The high use of the online 'Article Review' suggests
students know about these online resources, but do not see some as relevant to their
current needs. More exploration of this is warranted because there are indications that
student perceptions about online delivery of services are critical to their continued use and
positive referral through peer networks (Wright and O’Neill, 2002).
The library resources were, by and large, well used by the majority of the students
surveyed. Services such as the library tours were well publicised and academic staff
promoted the ability to use the library as a core skill in university study. The library tour
introduces students to online catalogues, electronic journals, databases and other
electronic resources, and the inclusion of this in the well utilised library tour may account
for the reported high usage of the library’s online resources. The School of Social Work
and Social Policy library liaison person was not well utilised by the majority of students
surveyed.
Most respondents used the resources available within the School, including enrolment
advisory sessions, introductory lectures during orientation and a range of staff members,
including lecturers, tutors and Program Directors. Administrative staff were not highly
utilised by many students. The pattern of usage of family, friends and other students as
supports by those surveyed is high. This finding is consistent with other findings about the
importance of peer networks in enhancing the first year experience (Peat, Dalziel and
Grant, 2001).
It is clear that students surveyed utilised supports and other services from both academic
staff and support staff, as well as from informal sources. This wide ranging usage
supports arguments for greater collaboration between academic staff and support staff in
6
providing services to first year students and in improving the first year learning
experience for all students (Pitkethley and Prosser, 2001). However, beyond accessing
supports and services is the issue of how students rated the quality of those which they
used.
Quality of Support
The group was asked to rate each service according to how useful they found it, and in
general most rated services between reasonable to very useful. The Article Review
support, used by 97% of the total cohort, is rated as 'reasonable' to 'very useful' by over
95% of responses, with none rating it ‘not helpful’ and only 4% of responses rated it as ‘a
little’ helpful One service, the ‘library tour’- a campus library familiarisation session for
new students, receives the most spread results on estimated quality of the service, with 9%
and 22% rating it ‘not useful’ and ‘a little useful’ respectively, and only 20% rating it as
‘very useful’. A similar number rate the value of ‘Using the Computer Network’ as ‘not
helpful’. Ditcher & Tetley (1999 p.4) found students in their study down-graded the value
of ‘learning support programs’, and it a useful comparison that in our study the supports
seen as most useful by most of the group are those offered through family, friends and
other students, with between 80% and 85% of respondents on these items scoring these as
reasonably to very well valued.
Reasons for non utilisation of Supports and Services
The graph below illustrates the reasons why students who knew about services and other
supports did not use them.
60
50
N
40
30
20
10
0
did not
need
could not
access
not
confident
other
The most common reasons were that students reported they did not need the services or
supports and ‘other‘. ‘Other‘ was the reason most often given, after ‘did not need‘ and
because these other reasons were not specified, the results are of limited value. However,
it appears from the results that access was not a predominant factor in non-utilisation of
supports and services. The results also indicate that lack of confidence was not a
significant factor in non utilisation.
It is useful to examine the concept of ‘need’ in the context of first year students. ‘Felt’
7
need is just one category of need, is constructed by those in an affected group and
emerges from their lived experience. Professionals who are external to the experience of
the affected group may define need quite differently. The students’ perceptions of need
may be closely linked with their view of what is relevant to their learning at the time and
to their transition tasks; staff perceptions of need will take into account future, as well as
current demands, and the factors which facilitate the process of learning beyond the first
year experience. Both of these views are partial, but together may contribute to retention.
An important role of academic and support staff may be to raise students’ awareness of
future demands that may be upon them to ensure that their ‘felt’ needs are inclusive
enough to respond to the demands of transition and of university study. The connecting
of different views of need may enable two of Mackie’s (2001) four forces - organisational
and individual – to influence positively student retention.
Conclusion
Although overall the students surveyed in this study appear to be knowledgeable about the
support services made available to them within the university, a couple of features in the
data suggest improvements are required in how some of these are offered. For example,
given the central importance of library as a resource to support most students, it is of
concern that students express discontent with the value of the ‘library tour’, more than
they do for most other supports and services. Likewise, ‘Using the Computer Network’,
attracts the only other similar sized negative response to a service, though a lower number
also rate ‘online resources’ and ‘transition to uni’ as ‘not helpful’. Whilst this is only a
small number of students, nonetheless they may represent an alienated group, who may be
at risk and discontented with these essential supports. As these service offer familarisation
with essential requirements for successful study, the results indicate further improvement
is required in what or how it is offered, to satisfy all users. Beder (1997) notes that new
students admit to not knowing how to use the library on starting university, that around
8% were unaware of vital service of support and over 70% had never used the service
offered. The levels of knowledge about services in our respondents appear comparable
with those found by Beder, but our group’s levels of use are much higher overall.
In many ways, the supports and services provided by the University of South Australia to
first year students are consistent with what the literature promotes as good practice. There
is a wide range of services; these are offered both as university-wide and program/course
specific supports; there is a degree of collaboration between support and academic staff;
and student use of informal supports suggests opportunities for peer networking.
Furthermore, student knowledge of, and rates and patterns of utilisation suggest that
supports and services are accessible to students. Students’ decisions about usage appear
to be based on their perception of need and relevance. However, supports and services
which are core to successful negotiation of participation in university life and to
successful study are rated variously by students, in terms of the value of the support. This
is of concern, especially as it may be the case that those who are discontented may be the
students at risk. This suggests that evaluation of these supports and services is required so
that the experience of students can inform their improved delivery. Students’ positive
experiences of supports and services contribute significantly to the effective transition of
first year students to the learning culture of the university.
8
References
Beder, S (1997) “Addressing the Issues of Social and Academic Integration for First year
Students: A Discussion Paper”, Ultibase Articles, downloaded 27 March 2003,
Http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec97/beder.1.htm.
Cairns, M. (2002) “The O Week experience: integrating student associations into the
orientation week program to represent and advance interests of students” Changing
Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference,
Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Calder, A. (2002) “Strategies for promoting learning communities: some ‘nuts and bolts’
solutions” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher
Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Cameron H. 1999, “University Access and First year performance or There’s more to a
good party than sending out the invitations”, Australian & New Zealand Journal of
Vocational Education Research , Vol. 7, No.2.
Dickson, J., Krause, K. and Rudman, S. “Making the transition to university – an
evaluation of academic orientation” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim
First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Ditcher, A. and Tetley J. (1999) "Factors influencing university students’ academic
success: what do students and academics think?" HERDSA International Conference,
Melbourne, 12- 15 July, 1999
Eijkman, H. (2002) “Reframing the first year experience: the critical role of ‘recognition
work’ in achieving curricular justice” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific
Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Emmitt, M., Warren, W. and Postill, K. (2002) “First year: the Deakin way” Changing
Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference,
Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Grove, J. (2002) “Peer mentoring programs – how do we know they really work?”
Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education
Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Hunter, S. and Tetley, J. (1999) "Lectures: why don’t students attend? Why do students
attend?" Paper presented at HERDSA Conference: Cornerstones – What do we value in
higher education? Melbourne, July 12 -15
Kantanis, T. (2000) “The role of social transition in students’ adjustment to the first-year
of university” Monash Transition Program, downloaded 22 September 2002,
http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/transition/research/kantanis3.html
Kantanis, T. (2001a) “Transition to self-directed learning: issues faced by students in
adjusting to the first year at university” Monash Transition Program, downloaded 22
September 2002, http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/transition/research/kantanis5.html
Kantanis, T. (2001b) “Transition program management: does it really matter who runs the
show?” Monash Transition Program, downloaded 22 September 2002,
http://www.adm.monash.edu.au/transition/research/kantanis6.html
Kantanis, T. (2002) “Same or different: issues that affect mature age undergraduate
students’ transition to university” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim
First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
9
Kift, S. (2002) “Assuring quality in the casualisation of teaching, learning and assessment:
towards best practice for the first year experience” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri
6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Lawrence, J. (2002) “The ‘deficit-discourse’ shift: university teachers and their role in
helping first year students persevere and succeed in the new university culture” Changing
Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference,
Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Mackie, S. (2001) “Jumping the Hurdles – Undergraduate Student Withdrawal
Behaviour”, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(3) 265-276.
Masono-Rogers, C. (2002) “Strategies for success in transition years: a comprehensive
portfolio of retention and success strategies at AUT: even years on from the 1995
inaugural Pacific First Year Experience Conference” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri
6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
McInnis, C. and James, R. (1995) First Year on Campus: Diversity in the Initial
Experiences of Australian Undergraduates, AGPS, Canberra.
McInnis, C. and Krause, K. (2002) “Getting students connected” Changing Agendas – Te
Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 910 July 2002.
McInnis, C. James, R. and Hartley, R. (2000) Trends in the First Year Experience In
Australian Universities, DETYA, C of A, Canberra.
McKenzie, K. and Schweitzer, R. (2001) “Who succeeds at university? Factors predicting
academic performance in first year Australian university students” Higher Education
Research and Development, 20, 1, pp21-34.
O’Shea, C. (2002) “Creating connections and campus community: facilitating the first
year experience” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in
Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Peat, M., Dalziel, J. and Grant, A. (2001) “Enhancing the first year student experience by
facilitating the development of peer networks through a one-day workshop” Higher
Education Research and Development, 20, 2, pp199-216.
Pitkethly, A. and Prosser, M. (2001) “The first year experience project: a model for
university-wide change” Higher Education Research and Development, 20, 2 pp185-198.
Tinto, V. (1993) Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition,
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Tinto, V. (1996) “Reconstructing the first year of college” Planning for Higher Education,
25, 1, pp1-6.
Waters, D. (2002) “Efficient and effective? Providing academic support for first-year
students” Changing Agendas – Te Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher
Education Conference, Christchurch, 9-10 July 2002.
Wright, C and O’Neill, M. (2002) “Service quality evaluation in the higher education
sector: an empirical investigation of students’ perceptions” Higher Education Research
and Development, 21, 1, May, pp23-40.
Zeegers, M. and Smith, P. (2002) “Softening the rock and the hard place: first year
education practicum and mentoring at the University of Ballarat” Changing Agendas – Te
Ao Hurihuri 6th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher Education Conference, Christchurch, 910 July 2002.
10